Ensuring Consistent Terminationof Composite Web ServicesAnLiul,2,3andQingLi2.3University of Science & Technology of China (USTC), Hefei, China2JointResearchLabofExcellenceCityU-USTC Advanced Research Institute, Suzhou, ChinaCity University of Hong Kong (CityU), Hong Kong, ChinaJune10,2007,IDAR'07,Beijing,China
June 10, 2007, IDAR’07, Beijing, China Ensuring Consistent Termination of Composite Web Services An Liu1,2,3 and Qing Li2,3 University of Science & Technology of China (USTC), Hefei, China 2 Joint Research Lab of Excellence CityU-USTC Advanced Research Institute, Suzhou, China City University of Hong Kong (CityU), Hong Kong, China
OutlineProblem Statement and BackgroundProblem Modeling and MethodologyFrameworkConclusion and Future WorkJune10,2007,DAR'07,Beijing,China
June 10, 2007, IDAR’07, Beijing, China Outline ◼ Problem Statement and Background ◼ Problem Modeling and Methodology ◼ Framework ◼ Conclusion and Future Work
Web Services CompositionWeb ServicesClient AppTravel AgentTaxiFlight HotelBooking RequestFlight RequestTaxi RequestTimelineFlightRes.OKTaxi Res. OKTaxiCancellationBooking ResponseReliable CompositionNeedsTransactional Support!June10,2007,IDAR'07.BeijingChina
June 10, 2007, IDAR’07, Beijing, China Web Services Composition Client App Travel Agent Booking Request Timeline Web Services Flight Hotel Taxi Flight Request Taxi Request Flight Res. OK Taxi Res. OK Booking Response Taxi Cancellation Reliable Composition Needs Transactional Support!
ACID Transaction InsufficientComposite web services Last for hours or days Work in an open environment Cross administrative boundariesACiD transaction is insufficient Trust and timeliness no longer applyCompensation-based transactionNo common transaction semanticsJune10,2007,DAR'07,Beijing,China
June 10, 2007, IDAR’07, Beijing, China ACID Transaction Insufficient ◼ Composite web services ❑ Last for hours or days ❑ Work in an open environment ❑ Cross administrative boundaries ◼ ACID transaction is insufficient ❑ Trust and timeliness no longer apply ◼ Compensation-based transaction ◼ No common transaction semantics
Some Representative Related WorkTransaction semantics declarationMikalsenet al. (2002):declare transaction semantics at operationlevelandtransactionalpropertyatservicelevelTransactional property (TP) deductionVidyasankarandVossen(2004):deductTPofcompositeservicesfromTPofcomponentservicesDifferentAtomicityRequirementsFauvet et al. (2005): support flexible atomicitythrough TP-basedserviceselectionBhiri et al. (2005): verify Accepted-Termination-States (ATS)based atomicitybysometransactional rulesMontagut and Molva (2006): supportATS-based atomicity throughTP-based service selectionand automatic coordinationJune10,2007,IDAR07,Beijing,China
June 10, 2007, IDAR’07, Beijing, China Some Representative Related Work ◼ Transaction semantics declaration ❑ Mikalsen et al. (2002): declare transaction semantics at operation level and transactional property at service level ◼ Transactional property (TP) deduction ❑ Vidyasankar and Vossen (2004): deduct TP of composite services from TP of component services ◼ Different Atomicity Requirements ❑ Fauvet et al. (2005): support flexible atomicity through TP-based service selection ❑ Bhiri et al. (2005): verify Accepted-Termination-States (ATS) based atomicity by some transactional rules ❑ Montagut and Molva (2006): support ATS-based atomicity through TP-based service selection and automatic coordination